elasto wrote:Quercus wrote:I disagree with this quite strongly. Unpublished and unpublicised art can nevertheless have a profound impact on the artist themselves.but attention seeking is basically essential to the medium. Good art that noone gets to see is of little value at the end of the day
I think you are taking what I said the wrong way. All I meant was that the more that good art is seen the more overall good it does. I guess for sake of clarity I should have written "attention seeking is basically essential to the medium. Good art that noone gets to see is of little value to society..."
Obviously each individual will take away what he takes away no matter whether he's one of ten to see it or one of a billion, but surely you agree that, all things being equal, a good artist whose work is seen widely is of exponentially more public good than one whose work is never seen.
Yeah, that's reasonable - I did indeed misinterpret your statement as something along the lines of "if your art isn't displayed or sold then what's the point of it"
This is like saying that therapy is of little value because no-one other than the therapist and the client gets to hear about it.
Well, to play devil's advocate, therapy that helps a person become better with his family and wider society is more beneficial than therapy that only benefits the client.
That's not to say that therapy that only improves the quality of life of a single client has no value, just that therapy that indirectly spills out to improve the quality of life of a wide circle has so much more.
This may be an unusual case but my art (principally photography) has at times been the sort of therapy that helps me become better with my family and wider society. In my case by helping me understand and process emotions in a much healthier way.
I'd contend that at lot of this discussion about the nature and purpose of art misses what is, to me, a vital component - the value of art to the artist as an expressive and explorative process, rather than the value to the consumer of art as a finished product.
The need to explore questions, externalise emotions or wrestle with problems are just as much drivers for the creation of art as the desire to say something to the world, influence people, gain recognition or make money.
As an artist myself, how could I disagree? But I still maintain if I create art that I and others enjoy it is of more value than when I create it for my enjoyment alone. But, yes, of course, I'd still create even if I were the last human being alive...
Yeah, I agree with this.